Law Shastra

RECKLESS SPLITTING OF WAGES INTO ALLOWANCES FOR EPF WILL COST DEARLY TO THE EMPLOYERS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Labour Law Reporter has been persistently warning the subscribers to adopt protective wage structure in view of the judgments of High Courts upholding all allowances except HRA will form part of basic wages for EPF contributions.  Now the Supreme Court in its judgment dated 28.2.2019 reported in 2019 LLR 399. has upheld the judgments of the High Courts.  An appeal by EPFO against judgment of Calcutta High Court has been accepted by the Supreme Court holding that special allowance will also form the part of wages for EPF contributions. ------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------             While issuing the appointment letters to the employees the employers' recklessness is foun

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 6221 OF 2011 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER (II) WEST BENGAL ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIVEKANANDA VIDYAMANDIR AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 39653966 OF 2013 SURYA ROSHNI LTD. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 39693970 OF 2013 UFLEX LTD. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 39673968 OF 2013 MONTAGE ENTERPRSES PVT. LTD. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) 1 TRANSFER CASE (C) NO(s).19 OF 2019 (arising out of T.P.(C)No. 1273 OF 2013) THE MANAGEMENT OF SAINTGOBAIN GLASS INDIA LTD. ...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES’ PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J. The appellants with the exception of

Back Ritu Bhatia Vs. Ministry of Civil Supplies Consumer Affairs & Public Distribution and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (05 Feb 2019) Words used in advertisement should be given a literal meaning and same is to be considered strictly MANU/SC/0143/2019 Service Present appeal was filed against the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court by which the Division Bench has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition dismissing the said writ petition by not interfering with the order terminating the services of the Appellant, the original writ Petitioner has preferred the present appeal. The question which is posed for consideration before present Court is, whether in the facts and circumstances of the case can it be said that the Appellant fulfilled the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement of having experience of five years 'as' a Co